Truth is the beginning of wisdom…

Quotes To Ponder

A democracy cannot exist as a permanent form of government. It can only exist until the voters discover that they can vote themselves largesse [money, bounty, assistance, gifts] from the public treasury.
- Alexis de Tocqueville

From that moment on, the majority always votes for the candidates promising the most benefits from the public treasury with the result that a democracy always collapses over loose fiscal policy, always followed by a dictatorship. The average age of the world's greatest civilizations has been 200 years.
- Alexander Frazer Tytler

Archive for May 15th, 2009

We keep hearing that the global temperature dramatically increased in the last century. But what does “global temperature” mean, and how reliable are the readings?

Global temperature is measured through thousands of stations located throughout the world. The continental United States itself has 1,221 such measuring points, and supposedly they are among the most reliable in the world. But how reliable are they? Anthony Watts, blogger of Watts Up With That, took it upon himself (and a group of more than 650 volunteers) to find out the reliability. They examined 70% of the stations and the results are nothing short of stunning.

They found stations located next to the exhaust fans of air conditioning units, surrounded by asphalt parking lots and roads, on blistering-hot rooftops, and near sidewalks and buildings that absorb and radiate heat. They found 68 stations located at wastewater treatment plants, where the process of waste digestion causes temperatures to be higher than in surrounding areas.

In fact, they found that 89% of the stations – nearly 9 of every 10 – fail to meet the National Weather Service’s own location requirements that stations must be 30 meters (about 100 feet) or more away from an artificial heating or radiating/reflecting heat source. In other words, 9 of every 10 stations are reporting higher or rising temperatures because they are badly sited.

It gets worse. They observed that changes in the technology of temperature stations over time, also has caused them to report a false warming trend. There were major gaps found in the data records that were filled in with data from nearby sites, a practice that propagates and compounds errors. They also found that adjustments to the data by both NOAA and NASA caused recent temperatures to look even higher. Why measure if you are going to change the results? Doesn’t that defeat the purpose of measuring? And these are supposed to be among the more reliable temperature readings in the world! Here is a file of the entire report. Read it and decide for yourself if you can trust that temperature data.

The conclusion is inescapable: The U.S. temperature record is unreliable.

So with ground temperature data now revealed as unreliable, what do we know? Satellite Data indicates that the earth warmed from the period of 1979 to around 1998, and that it has cooled since 2002. That is 19 years of warming, and at least 7 years of cooling … and very little else that we know for certain. On the basis of this, countries around the world have instituted disastrous and business-damaging programs like carbon taxes or cap-and-trade programs. Very soon the United States will consider the Waxman-Markey bill, which would enact a cap and trade program to tax us on what we exhale after ever breath we take in. They tell us the science is settled … on what? … flawed data!

And finally, Richard Henry Lee at the American Thinker Blog asks perhaps the most important question to arise from this discovery: “But the real question is why it took a dedicated group of volunteers to find the numerous faults in our temperature record rather than the heavily funded governmental and educational institutions which are continually warning us about global warming.”

That one isn’t hard to answer … those institutions, seeing their coffers fill up with each doomsday prediction, simply didn’t care to look.

The attempt to prove that homosexuality is determined biologically has been dealt a knockout punch. An American Psychological Association publication includes an admission that there’s no homosexual “gene” – meaning homosexuals aren’t born that way.

For decades, the APA has not considered homosexuality a psychological disorder, while other professionals in the field consider it to be a “gender-identity” problem. But the new statement, which appears in a brochure called “Answers to Your Questions for a Better Understanding of Sexual Orientation & Homosexuality,” states the following:

“There is no consensus among scientists about the exact reasons that an individual develops a heterosexual, bisexual, gay or lesbian orientation. Although much research has examined the possible genetic, hormonal, developmental, social, and cultural influences on sexual orientation, no findings have emerged that permit scientists to conclude that sexual orientation is determined by any particular factor or factors.”

That contrasts with the APA’s statement in 1998: “There is considerable recent evidence to suggest that biology, including genetic or inborn hormonal factors, play a significant role in a person’s sexuality.”

Peter LaBarbera, who heads Americans for Truth About Homosexuality, believes the more recent statement is an important admission because it undermines an unproven popular theory. “People need to understand that the ‘gay gene’ theory has been one of the biggest propaganda boons of the homosexual movement over the last 10 – 15 years,” he points out. “Studies show that if people think that people are born homosexual they’re much less likely to resist the gay agenda.”

Matt Barber with the Liberty Counsel feels the pronouncement may have something to do with saving face. “Well, I think here the American Psychological Association is finally trying to restore some credibility that they’ve lost over the years by having become a clearly political organization as opposed to an objective, scientific organization,” he states.

With the new information from the APA I wonder if the organization will admit that homosexuals who want to change can change. Homosexuality is defined by behavior and untold thousands of people have found freedom from that lifestyle through reparative therapy or … most effectively … a relationship with Jesus Christ.

LaBarbera in agreement says, “Change through Christ is possible – and it’s one of the most heartwarming aspects of the whole gay debate. Many men and women have come out of homosexuality, mostly through a relationship with Jesus Christ. The fact that these professional organizations will not study that, will not acknowledge that, shows how ‘in the tank’ they are for the homosexual movement.”

Just because elites will not recognize the change does not mean the change does not exist … God changes people through Jesus Christ regardless of the sin.

Big Labor’s Investment In Obama Pays Off !

Andy Stern, president of the Service Employees International Union, boasted to the Las Vegas Sun this week “We spent a fortune to elect Barack Obama – $60.7 million to be exact – and we’re proud of it.” This labor organization’s leadership is getting its money’s worth too. Whether rank-and-file workers and ordinary taxpayers are profiting from this ultimate campaign pay-for-play scheme is another matter entirely.

The two-million-member union, which represents both government and private service employees, proudly claimed that its workers “knocked on 1.87 million doors, made 4.4 million phone calls … and sent more than 2.5 million pieces of mail in support of Obama.” It dispatched SEIU leaders to 7 states in the final weekend before the election to get out the vote for Obama and other Democrats.

Through a series of local chapter takeovers and bully campaigns to destroy the reputation of executives who refuse to submit to their will, Stern and his scandal-plagued lieutenants have consolidated low-skill service workers to create a 21st century labor empire. The ubiquitous Stern now enjoys a prominent seat at the table of every major policy discussion at the White House, including economic recovery and healthcare radicalization.

Obama champions the SEIU’s top legislative priorities: expansive government healthcare (paid for with regressive sin taxes) and the “Employee Free Choice Act” to do away with private-ballot union elections in the workplace. He has SEIU-blessed bureaucrats installed in every corner of his administration to carry out the agenda.

The SEIU scored not one but two Cabinet appointees: Health and Human Services Secretary Kathleen Sebelius and Labor Secretary Hilda Solis. The SEIU pitched in with maximum donations to Solis’ first congressional campaign and lent her nearly 300 canvassers and ground troops. “I wouldn’t be here, were it not for my friends in the labor movement,” she gushed. Indeed, over four terms in Congress, Solis has pocketed more than $900,000 in union campaign contributions.

Former SEIU chief lobbyist Patrick Gaspard served as the Obama campaign’s national political director and transition deputy director of personnel. During the 2004 election cycle, he led the George Soros-funded group America Coming Together (ACT) as national field director. SEIU poured $23 million of workers’ dues money into ACT in its failed attempt to put Democratic Sen. John Kerry in the White House. Under Gaspard’s tenure at ACT, the get-out-the-vote group employed convicted felons as canvassers and committed campaign finance violations that led to a $775,000 fine by the Federal Election Commission. Gaspard was appointed White House political director shortly after Election Day 2008.

SEIU Secretary-Treasurer Anna Burger was appointed to the president’s Economic Recovery Advisory Board to provide advice on “boosting the sagging U.S. economy” (translation: imposing new employment regulations on companies and expanding union membership rolls).

Within two weeks of moving into the White House, Obama signed a series of executive orders championed by union bosses. The new rules authorized sweeping powers for the labor secretary that essentially blackball non-union contractors targeted by labor organizers and blacklist non-union employees in the private sector from working on taxpayer-funded projects. Such regulatory favoritism limits freedom in the workplace and raises the cost of doing business.

Another measure immediately adopted by Obama requires that when a government service contract runs out and there’s a new contract to perform the same services at the same location, the new contractor must retain the old workers. Mickey Kaus of the left-leaning Slate magazine dubbed the move the “Labor Payoff of the Day.”

The payoffs keep coming. Last week Obama slashed the Labor Department’s funding to investigate union corruption – a welcome move for Stern, who has seen three of his handpicked deputies resign in 2008-2009 over financial scandals involving cronyism, nepotism, and embezzlement.

California officials also reported last week that the Obama White House gave the SEIU an unprecedented role in negotiations over federal stimulus funds. According to the Los Angeles Times, the union lobbied the feds to withhold nearly $7 billion in stimulus money from California unless it revoked a wage cut for unionized healthcare workers – which had already been approved by Democratic lawmakers as part of a budget deal forged in February. Top SEIU officials participated in a conference call last month on the issue; the Obama White House backs the union demands.

SEIU’s enforcers have set aside $10 million to un-elect any of its political beneficiaries who abandon their pledges to do the union’s legislative bidding. The campaign money was raised by slapping an extra $6-per-member fee on top of regular dues payments – and funneled straight to the union’s political action committee. Meanwhile, after spending a fortune to put Obama in office, the union laid off a third of its DC field staff (in violation of its own employment protections, according to the workers) due to … budget troubles.

These laid-off workers are collateral damage in Big Labor’s pursuit of power. The only jobs guaranteed by SEIU’s merger with Hope and Change, Inc. belong to their management.

Usually May is the time of the year when students are fitted for the cap and gown, count their credits, and pay their school bill. With a firm handshake and a costly piece of paper, they will start their lives in the real world.Too bad that won’t be true for Julea Ward, who used to be a graduate student at Eastern Michigan University until she was kicked out for her religious beliefs.

Ms. Ward was enrolled in a graduate program at the school and as part of her education was required to enroll in a counseling practicum. In that practicum, she was assigned a case involving a homosexual who needed help. Ms. Ward did not feel that she could affirm the student’s homosexual lifestyle because of her Christian beliefs, so she asked her supervisor what she should do. His advice was to refer the student to a counselor who had no qualms with affirming homosexual behavior. That is what she did, and it was all done before she saw the student. There was no counseling that took place between the two, there was no confrontation between the two, and there was no condemnation of homosexuality – just an honest confession of her deeply held religious belief. The story doesn’t end there though.

Julea was summoned to appear before a disciplinary hearing and told that if she wanted to continue on with her graduate program, she would have to submit to a “remediation” program so that she could see “the error of her ways.” She refused to be forced into a re-education program designed to convert her from biblical faith, and as a result, she was kicked out of school. This is the “tolerance” at America’s education facilities … no tolerance for anyone who does not agree with someone else’s thought!

Now, remember, Julea didn’t demand that the student be denied help, she didn’t get in his face and tell him he’s condemned to hell, she didn’t even roll her eyes and give a general impression of disgust. She simply told the truth, obeyed what her supervisor told her to do, and carried on with her life.

Does it scare you that the people overseeing her program weren’t content with the fact that she acted properly and with integrity? Does is scare you that they wanted her to change not just her actions, but her religious beliefs?Would they say that to any other belief except Christianity? No!

Parents, if you have a child in a publicly funded college or university, this should make all kinds of alarms go off in your head. Any parent who takes their faith seriously should be very concerned.

Publicly funded colleges and universities, and even private schools, used to pride themselves on being open forums, encouraging diversity of beliefs and philosophies. They still think that is what they are, but the truth is very clear: they are only open to ideas that are not from an evangelical Christian worldview … and make sure you don’t practice what you believe.

Now the government is getting into the act of criminalizing your Christian conscience. Two pieces of legislation heading for Congress are sure to be used to turn what used to be religious principles into a crime. The administration is moving to repeal the “conscience clause” that protects healthcare workers from performing procedures that violate their beliefs, and protects faith-based healthcare facilities (think Catholic hospitals) from being sued for not performing abortions and the like. If the conscience clause is overturned, following your faith-informed conscience will no longer be constitutionally protected, and may well become a criminal act.

The second piece of legislation that attacks Christian faith is the so-called “hate speech” rule (H.R. 1913 / S. 909). Under this proposed law, cloaked in the guise of “protection,” it is possible to see courts prosecuting any people of faith from speaking out against homosexuality, abortion, fetal stem-cell experimentation, and a host of other issues not deemed politically correct.Every issue will be open to “whoever’s interpretation” and once again this administration’s social engineers will be at work.

Maybe we need to change our national motto from “In God We Trust” to “Trust in God at Your Own Peril.”

Sweden Approves Gender-Based Abortions

Sweden has made it legal for a mother to let her unborn child be aborted if she is not happy with its gender:

Swedish women will be permitted to abort their children based on the sex of the fetus, according to a ruling by Sweden’s National Board of Health and Welfare.

The ruling was spurred by a request from Kai Wedenberg, head of the clinic where a woman twice requested, and received, an abortion based on sex. Mr. Wedenberg asked for clarification from health officials after a woman, who already had two girls, requested amniocentesis and to be told the sex of her unborn child. She found out she was pregnant with another girl and asked for an abortion six days later.

The woman then became pregnant again, returned to the clinic and asked for another amniocentesis, which was not performed. Later, at her ultrasound, she asked the nurse to reveal the sex of her fetus, which was a girl. After learning this, the mother requested an abortion later that day and received it later that week.

It is an incredible bad sign of the times: people do no longer respect human life. Having a child was once considered a blessing, no matter its gender. Today, not anymore in the many countries in which people have forgotten that human beings are the most exceptional and wonderful of all God’s creations … America is on that road under this administration.